Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

api-evangelist

by com.apievangelist
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_building_block

Read-only

One building block by type + slug; include=["content"] returns the full body.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesBuilding-block slug within `type`, as find_building_blocks returns it, e.g. "access" with type "guidance".
typeYesBuilding-block type: guidance, rules, policies, standards, strategies, schema, properties, experiences or lifecycle.
contextNoOptional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.
includeNoPass ["content"] to inline the full body (Pro). Omitted, you get the summary.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include / description
      Added value: +"Pass [\"content\"] to inline the full body (Pro). Omitted, you get the summary."
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"Building-block slug within `type`, as find_building_blocks returns it, e.g. \"access\" with type \"guidance\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Added value: +"Building-block type: guidance, rules, policies, standards, strategies, schema, properties, experiences or lifecycle."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the default-vs-inline behavior (summary unless include=["content"]) and hints at a Pro gate, but says nothing about lookup failures or what the summary contains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence with the primary behavior front-loaded and no filler. Every clause carries information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only lookup with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential retrieval semantics. The only real gap is error behavior when the slug does not exist.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters — including the unusual 'context' parameter and the include enum — are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the include behavior, adding no new semantics, which lands on the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb (get) and resource (building block) plus the identity key (type + slug), which is enough to distinguish it from the plural finder sibling. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with find_building_blocks, so it falls just short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the required type+slug key — you call this when you already know the exact block. There is no explicit statement of when not to use it or a pointer to find_building_blocks for discovery, which is the obvious alternative.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All api-evangelist toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources